Re: Re: [OGo-Users] Some impressions and comments about OGo

On Sun, 9 Dec 2007, Adam Tauno WIlliams wrote:

>>> It is Open Source
>> > so if it doesn't do something you want you are free to fix/extend it.
>> Yes, but because the whole world is free to participate in the project,
>> does that mean the whole world shares
>> the responsibility for it?
>
> Sorry, but I can't think of any definition of "responsibility" where
> this question makes any sense.

Okay... well let me explain why I asked that question. Partly it's 
because I somewhat have this feeling of grudge against open source 
developers in general because I get so frustrated with the usability of 
the linux desktop.. ;) , but also because I find it interesting to see 
how open source teams deal with product development and the resolving of 
issues.

I think a big part of the incentive for change in this world is born out 
of things, people, situations and products not meeting our ever 
increasing 'standards'. They only other incentive - there are only two - 
is that people just enjoy creating something better. I call this the 
negative and the positive incentive. The first one tries to avoid an 
unacceptable condition, the other tries to create an 'envisioned' one. I 
think politics is mainly driven by the first one (problem resolution - 
reactive) while such a thing as open source development is often powered 
more by the second one (creating new things - creative)....

But when people start using a product, they want it to meet their 
standards of usability, and if it doesn't, they get frustrated, and 
start trying to get the ones responsible for the product to resolve this 
unacceptable situation; but the incentive for this is primarily the 
negative one.... and if you're just doing something for fun, you have no 
need for someone else's 'problems', so you are like "if you want it to 
be fixed, then fix it :)". But if you percieve something as a problem, 
you start to go and look for who is responsible for that unacceptible 
situation, and demand that they fix it, for you feel they are 
responsible for your problem. But in reality, it is your demands, your 
'standards' that created the problem, not the product itself. Using 
linux can be frustrating, but only because of your lack of patience and 
other things you think you can't live without....

So maybe the whole problem with the open source world is not the lack of 
organisation or the lack of professionality or the lack of 
accountability... but simply all those big and unyielding requirements 
we have of life and of ourselves. There is a reason most ppl in the 
developed countries are less happy than those in the undeveloped 
countries and I think it is because they (we) require and demand much 
more of life.

So whereas the demanding user wants to know who is responsible for the 
*problem situation*, the team is only interested in who is responsible 
for the *product* (more or less), and when the team says "you can fix it 
if you want to", to the user that feels as if the team is not taking 
responsibility for the problem situation, which it indeed is not doing, 
because the problem belongs to the user, and the team considers itself 
responsible not for the problem but for the product. Okay this may be 
quite a black-and-white picture of things, but I think you catch my drift.

Interesting :) .

greetz, bart.
-- 
OpenGroupware.org Discussion [email protected]
http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss